NorthwestSportsFan wrote:Flex scheduling is only applicable to weeks 11-17 I believe, so the game at Atlanta can't be flexed. Also, only the afternoon games can be flexed, so the only games that can be flexed are vs Vikings (wk 11), at 49ers (wk 14), vs Cardinals (wk 16), and vs Rams (wk 17).

No way we get flexed against Cards and Rams.

49ers? Yeah there is a high chance it gets flexed.

highly doubt it. I'm guessing Fox will protect that game from being flexed.

Lady Talon wrote:lol late season short week for our game at San Fran. Guess they had to stack the deck after that last head to head.

Or maybe they decided to switch it up because Seattle has come to SF first the past 2 seasons.

Not sure why so many of you are complaining about the early games. 49ers had 5 10 AM road games in 2011, plus they had to fly cross country for a Thursday night game at the Ravens. They went 5-0 in those games, lost to the Ravens, and went 13-3 on the year. Good teams win regardless.

not complaining about it being late season. Nor the 10 am games. I'm saying the being the visitor on the short week to our clearly best competition in the division (which are by nature nastier and more important then AFC games on a short week) is a bit suspicous. at least last year when the Hawks visited, we both had the same amount of days to prepare.

Lady Talon wrote:lol late season short week for our game at San Fran. Guess they had to stack the deck after that last head to head.

I'm sure you already know this, but SF had that exact deck stacked against them last year. Cross-country to play Pats on Sunday night, and then to Seattle the next week. Might not be a short week, but that might be the most brutal two road games a team can have in a row.

Need to stop caring what time games start. Who here can't do your job and do it right at 10am? People in all fields of work from paper salesmen to Navy SEALS routinely fly long distances and do their job the next day. No more excuses.

“If somebody thinks they're a hedgehog, presumably you just give them a mirror and a few pictures of hedgehogs and tell them to sort it out for themselves.”

I prefer the home division games late, but doesn't matter. only thing that bothers me is a short week between two of Vegas' top Super Bowl favorites in a road division game. That's kind of obvious of them isn't it?

Lady Talon wrote:lol late season short week for our game at San Fran. Guess they had to stack the deck after that last head to head.

Or maybe they decided to switch it up because Seattle has come to SF first the past 2 seasons.

Not sure why so many of you are complaining about the early games. 49ers had 5 10 AM road games in 2011, plus they had to fly cross country for a Thursday night game at the Ravens. They went 5-0 in those games, lost to the Ravens, and went 13-3 on the year. Good teams win regardless.

Yeah i agree. The amount of whining in this thread about the 10am games is embarrassing for seahawk fans. Thats all this place is... people complaining.

He is getting paid $16 millions to be all in and doesn't have an option...

In regards to my 10am post - it was across the board. I referred to west-coast teams and also saw that Oakland is in the same boat week 1. Goddell made a clear statement last year that they would look at changing it and it simply didn't happen.....

Like many have said on the other thread, this is a screwing of the Seahawks, plain and simple. And it could have been all of the possible six if the game at St. Louis wasn't a Monday nighter. Several of these games could have easily been 4 PM Eastern/1 PM Pacific start times and I am very surprised the game at Indy isn't. It really appears the league is stacking the first half schedule deck against our team. Furthermore as kearly pointed out, the opening game in Carolina will be ugly hot and humid much like the opener in Jacksonville was the year our team eventually went to *XL. Most of you know how that game turned out. This isn't fair to the Hawks this year and it wasn't fair to the 9ers last year and I get sick to death of the league screwing the west coast teams. Fortunately, like other folks have said I believe the Giants game will be flexed and that will drop the overall number of 10 AM games to 4.

2) Not only do the Hawks have five 10 AM games, but three of the first five games overall start at that time

This could create a slow start.

3) Back to back road games at 10 AM vs. the 2 best teams in the AFC South in weeks 4 & 5

Frankly I'll be quite pleased with a split of these 2.

4) Hawks have to travel again this year for a Thursday night game making a short week even shorter

Seems to me if you travel one year for a Thursday nighter, you should be home the next season.

Things about the schedule I like

1) As kearly said, the 2nd half is much easier.

Should allow the team to build momentum toward playoffs.

2) 4 of the last 6 at home

See above

3) Last 2 at home

See above

4) At least the ROAD Thurs. night game is at Arizona

And they are going to suck big time IMO

5) Week 15 at the Giants is a positive

What you say? Why? Because, this game will prepare the Hawks for their eventual return to play in the same stadium on Super Bowl Sunday. They could well have familiarity with any winds, the temperature, etc. as this game is in December.

6) There are 11 days between the Thursday night game in week 7 and the Monday night game in week 8

This is almost an extra bye week and could be very advantageous as far as injuries getting healed is concerned.

Oddities of this schedule

1) All 4 AFC opponents this year will be played in consecutively in weeks 3-6. Strange

The annoying this about the 10am games is that outside of the 49ers, our 4 toughest opponents are 10am games. Atlanta, Indianapolis, NY and Houston. 3 playoff teams and one that just missed.

That's crazy.

RynoHawk wrote:cannot flex week 16, it applies to games 11-15, 17.

wheres that coming from?we were flexed in week 16 last year?

On an EXTREMELY positive note, last year's week 11 bye week was extremely beneficial as we came out of the bye week in excellent form, and you could see the difference in the players' energy by the time the playoffs came around. Yes, we lost the first game at Miami, but this year we have the bye in week 12 and come back on a Monday night at home - I simply can't see that being a loss, and hopefully we can take that good form right through to week 22

Lady Talon wrote:lol late season short week for our game at San Fran. Guess they had to stack the deck after that last head to head.

I'm sure you already know this, but SF had that exact deck stacked against them last year. Cross-country to play Pats on Sunday night, and then to Seattle the next week. Might not be a short week, but that might be the most brutal two road games a team can have in a row.

Now I'm starting to see the value of having 49ers fans posting in our forums. You're here to set the record straight (even though you're sure this is already known... you'd better go ahead and make sure we have that from you to mull over.) None of us are privy to other teams schedules and had no idea your team had to travel east as the Seahawks did to Toronto. I think we're onto something here. That distance the Seahawks had to travel was the cutoff. Go any farther and you're going to get a 40-burger dropped on you the next week. Again, you completely miss the point of a Seahawks fan (this time Lady Talon) who was merely commenting that it's interesting to see the NFL schedule SEA @ SF on a short week with that glorious SNF still fresh in the minds of the world who witnessed all the talk being settled on the field between the two teams. Her point was that short weeks are short weeks. NFL commentators bring it up as a factor. So, if anything, it is merely mentioned as a potential disadvantage as we (Seahawks fans, not you) look toward our teams schedule. She wasn't making an excuse. None needed. It was merely an observation. Observations don't necessitate rival fans chiming in incessantly whenever you feel your teams' perceived superiority could come into question. Your argument really has nothing to do with a short week as you said.

Interesting data and that Sando brings it up, must be at least worth making an observation. SD didn't do too bad, but they are still searching for their first Super Bowl win as well. I think the media blows it out of proportion and they are the ones who tend to use it as an excuse. So, when fans discuss this potential "factor" - really any mere mentioning of it - fans are whining? Come on, Seahawks fans. If you see good teams like Seattle (@Atlanta) and then SF (@Atlanta) look like they're asleep in the first half - uncharacteristically - in addition to numbers like this... is it really necessary to insult other fans who acknowledge there could be something to this? Of course these guys are professsionals and no excuses are being made. But, are we going to call Pete Carroll a whiner? After all, he said after the Atlanta loss that we need to get a home game. Shouldn't the team be "good enough" to win no matter what various factors exist? It's not whining. It's an observation. If there's nothing at all to these factors, then those playing the game either wouldn't be mentioning it... or Pete Carroll is a whiner like the fans you are labeling. I see nothing embarrassing about a discussion about it. It's there. Ignoring it doesn't make it go away. Winning 10am start games on the road helps. I don't think with the team the Seahawks are that any of us truly fear playing at 10am. Just interesting what the schedule makers have done and seems like most fans making note of this are merely acknowledging a potential factor as we hope and trust we'll see the Seahawks get off to equally fast starts whether it's 10am on the road or a perfect setting home game.

Other teams are forced to play at the CLink...I'll take my 10am starts knowing we have the Ace card at home. Good teams win whenever/wherever they are to play. You make your adjustments and roll with it. You can't complain...once a team starts doing that, then it manifests into a loss. If you can't change it...embrace it. Adversity makes a team stronger. And the biggest adversity I see is the game at SF following the Monday Nighter. At least that Monday game is at home (where West coast teams get the "luxury" of the game ending at 9ish and not 12am-ish) then our shortest road trip possible. (Man...I sound like Russell Wilson right now! haha)

Good grief, you'd think this is 2004 given all the whining about the 10am games. Yeah, it's not perfect, but they should be good enough to deal with it. If 10am games put that much of a dent into our performance, we aren't as good as we were expecting

AGREED! Let's stop the built in excuses. This club will be ready to kick arse no matter where and what time! If we really are a super bowl calibur team than this doesn't matter. It will only make the Seahawks stronger.

AGREED! Let's stop the built in excuses. This club will be ready to kick arse no matter where and what time! If we really are a super bowl calibur team than this doesn't matter. It will only make the Seahawks stronger.

Ok, "Give me an S..... , Give me an E.... " Again, fellow Seahawks fans. Please see the point that there's a difference between acknowledging a possible factor that Sando even brings up vs. labeling your fellow fans "whiners". I doubt there's any Hawks fan who thinks this team is in trouble in any game. That's not the point of the matter.

Hmmm.... I wonder how these stats compare to west coast teams traveling east to play at 1 p.m. pacific?

That is column two the one that says later - that is anything but 10am games so throws in MNF etc.

For the poster that said that SD did good. Yes BUT look at their record in the other group. they went 12-11 early games and 16-9 in later games. Once again a clear trend of doing better in the afternoon / night games on the east coast

This is five years of data - you can choose to ignore it or think the Seahawks are above it but it is a negative to the west coast teams. It is a shame for any west coast team and I am mainly ignored that Goodell said "The league is working on scheduling more East Coast games involving West Coast teams in late-afternoon slots to avoid what amounts to a 10 a.m. kickoff for the western teams."

AGREED! Let's stop the built in excuses. This club will be ready to kick arse no matter where and what time! If we really are a super bowl calibur team than this doesn't matter. It will only make the Seahawks stronger.

Ok, "Give me an S..... , Give me an E.... " Again, fellow Seahawks fans. Please see the point that there's a difference between acknowledging a possible factor that Sando even brings up vs. labeling your fellow fans "whiners". I doubt there's any Hawks fan who thinks this team is in trouble in any game. That's not the point of the matter.

According to that chart, the Hawks have a better winning percentage in 10 AM starts than later starts. Just saying.

Why not see for yourself. If you normally wake up at 7am then try and wake up at 5am and see how you perform at work. Oh and by the way why not fly some 1500 miles a couple days before and if I forgot to mention have 50k+ fans watching you work and also have it televised. 100 yards is 100 yards but it can seem like 1000 when you are jet lagged and haven't gotten enough sleep.

You do realize that PC and staff plan for this by leaving a day early to get acclimated to the time. I guarantee you PC doesn't blame the losses on the early start.

Hmmm.... I wonder how these stats compare to west coast teams traveling east to play at 1 p.m. pacific?

That is column two the one that says later - that is anything but 10am games so throws in MNF etc.

For the poster that said that SD did good. Yes BUT look at their record in the other group. they went 12-11 early games and 16-9 in later games. Once again a clear trend of doing better in the afternoon / night games on the east coast

This is five years of data - you can choose to ignore it or think the Seahawks are above it but it is a negative to the west coast teams. It is a shame for any west coast team and I am mainly ignored that Goodell said "The league is working on scheduling more East Coast games involving West Coast teams in late-afternoon slots to avoid what amounts to a 10 a.m. kickoff for the western teams."

Well both of our schedules have their "yays" and "nays". I am happy to see that they decided to make things fair after last year and have our first matchup at your joint week 2 when it will be far too early to decide anything, and better yet BOTH our teams will/should be healthy.

DISCLAIMER:

The trash talking that I do occasionally this week is strictly for gamesmanship between opposing fanbases as a result of our upcoming matchup this week on SNF. It by no means should be taken personally.

Why not see for yourself. If you normally wake up at 7am then try and wake up at 5am and see how you perform at work. Oh and by the way why not fly some 1500 miles a couple days before and if I forgot to mention have 50k+ fans watching you work and also have it televised. 100 yards is 100 yards but it can seem like 1000 when you are jet lagged and haven't gotten enough sleep.

You do realize that PC and staff plan for this by leaving a day early to get acclimated to the time. I guarantee you PC doesn't blame the losses on the early start.

Do you have a link to this information? Last year it was discussed that they do not do anything different for East Coast travel days. This was discussed when many thought they should leave earlier for those games. Several of us also said they should have gone straight from DC to Atlanta.......

NinerLifer wrote:Well both of our schedules have their "yays" and "nays". I am happy to see that they decided to make things fair after last year and have our first matchup at your joint week 2 when it will be far too early to decide anything, and better yet BOTH our teams will/should be healthy.

Yeah but the problem for your guys is that by the time Seattle comes to the Twig late in the season they'll have the division all sewn up so there won't be anything to play for.....Oh wait, the Seahawks be gunning for HFA throughout the playoffs so I guess our team will still be dialed in.

NinerLifer wrote:Well both of our schedules have their "yays" and "nays". I am happy to see that they decided to make things fair after last year and have our first matchup at your joint week 2 when it will be far too early to decide anything, and better yet BOTH our teams will/should be healthy.

Yeah but the problem for your guys is that by the time Seattle comes to the Twig late in the season they'll have the division all sewn up so there won't be anything to play for.....Oh wait, the Seahawks be gunning for HFA throughout the playoffs so I guess our team will still be dialed in.

In all honesty, I don't see that scenario with your schedule. For the reasons that have already been complained about in this thread.

DISCLAIMER:

The trash talking that I do occasionally this week is strictly for gamesmanship between opposing fanbases as a result of our upcoming matchup this week on SNF. It by no means should be taken personally.

OK, lets call it for what it is. The NFL's way of steering parity. Last year it was the Niners that everyone thought would run away with the Lombardi without a real challenge. They had a brutal schedule including 5 10am east coast starts. They handled it very well and for the most part overcame it. This year it is the Seahawks that are threatening to rip the lid off and so we now need to respond in kind.

You can look at those 10am starts as the NFL feeling those teams (mostly last years playoff teams) need a head start. Fine. We'll give you two quarters to do your best but beware of waking the sleeping Giant. I will trust our defense to keep things interesting early but I will give no apologies for the damage we will wreak in the second half.

I think we are up for the challenge plus the future is bright for this very young team.

Beat the best in their house and on their schedule and earn the respect. The earn everything is coming into full swing.

xCalibur wrote:NFL Network shows some love and picks Seattle to finish this schedule at 12-4...anyone else agree with this...i defintely can see us pulling oout at least another 11-5 against this schedule.

However, this table has no adjustment for time, which indicates the actual start time of the game is not nearly as important as the travel itself.

[...]

Well this shakes things up quite a bit. Our Western teams have managed an excellent 30-30 record on the road in early starts in the Central Time Zone.How can this happen? Isn’t travelling to the likes of Green Bay, Houston, Dallas, Chicago, Minnesota, Tennessee, St. Louis, Kansas City and New Orleans still difficult? It may not be as far as New England or Miami, but it’s still a travel.

And yet, they are .500 against Central teams, and a miserable 19-52 (.268) against Eastern teams during those dreaded 1 p.m. EST starts. They are even 3-10 (.231) in the games that start at 4 p.m. EST. One of those wins was San Diego's Philip Rivers throwing a late touchdown to Vincent Jackson at the New York Giants in 2009.

Does the one extra time zone really make that big of a difference? Based on this data, we have to cautiously say yes.